A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Disk Brakes Again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 27th 19, 12:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Disk Brakes Again

On 5/26/2019 7:15 PM, jbeattie wrote:

You should see all the bikes we needed in 1951 -- from World Travelers to Hornets. https://waterfordbikes.com/SchwinnCa...960/index.html Hornet? To ride when one feels like stinging someone one supposes. A Phantom when one feels like being invisible? https://waterfordbikes.com/SchwinnCa...0/1953_01.html Pffff. Ten separate bikes to do what I can do on my two year old carbon fiber disc Synapse. Thank God for the modern era. No more of those bar end streamers!


Bar end streamers! I bet nobody's studied the safety benefits!

These days, you could light them up with LEDs! Hey, if only one life
could be saved...


--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #32  
Old May 27th 19, 02:52 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Friday, May 24, 2019 at 10:07:31 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, May 24, 2019 at 9:27:51 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
I don't know how many of you watched the Amgen Tour of California but I think it was a Frenchman that got way hell and gone off of the front on Stage 5 I think.

As he was descending a rather long and steep climb he looked like an absolute beginner. All of his lines were screwed up and he almost went off the road several times. On one occasion he ran off of the road and up onto the sloped dirt siding.

I could not understand how someone that could ride 7 minutes off the front of a 140 mile race was so amateurish descending. He wasn't tired because he kept his lead for a very long way after the descent finishing with a full 7 minute lead.

Two days ago during some rain I was looking at videos and ran across one of them by a pro that showed himself descending almost identically amateurishly. The same bad lines though the corners and the same very dangerous lines.

He blamed this entirely on his disk brakes. He said climbing they drag and make noises and descending they cannot be relied upon to slow you properly. The upshot is he said that NO PRO would choose disk brakes over rim brakes and that this was just another gadget to up the price of a bike.

When I was talking here about how too F-ing powerful the large disks were and how much better the V-brakes were on a cross bike I got a whole lot of static. Well it appears that the same problem is on road bikes with the smaller disks.

They also have an aero disadvantage and I can tell you that the new bikes are so aero that you have to be careful descending in a group because you keep closing up on those in front.

The original idea was to have an alternate way to brake so that you wouldn't wear out the braking surface of carbon wheels. But using the artificial cork brake pads allows you to use a set of carbon wheels as long as you can the super-light aluminum wheels with standard brake pads.

Although we are presently in a trade dispute with China I don't expect that to last long and carbon wheels from China only seem to have one problem - they do not have much spoke tension and so move around too much in side winds. And they are spectacularly cheap.

While the US made carbon wheels are slightly more aero it isn't by much and unless you're riding TT's it isn't worth paying six to eight times the price.

Another problem - rim brakes put all of the braking forces at the strongest portion of the bike. Disks put the forces at the weakest. This forces manufacturers to make much heavier forks and rear stays. And the axles have gone to much larger sizes that cannot be used with quick releases. Pro mechanics no long change out wheels on bikes but make entire bike changes and that costs a lot more time than it used to.

All in all I think that disks are nothing more than something different to buy if you're a non-mechanical enthusiast that is likely to go with the flow.


Here is what some pros say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX_EPa0ZuSM

Discs do give better braking with CF rims, they don't heat rim glue, so you don't get sew-ups squirming around on the rims. If I were doing a long descent with lots of braking on sew-ups, I might prefer a disc. Otherwise, on a rapid descent on a racing bike with clinchers on aluminum rims on dry pavement, there is no a whole lot of difference between the two, assuming both are properly adjusted and the pistons lubricated. I own both and don't find much difference, except in ways that are equally bad, e.g. rim brakes grabbing at seams or with contaminants on the rim and discs shuddering or grabbing or screaming.

If disc brakes are juiced up to the point where light braking locks up the wheel, then that's a problem. If one is used to the requisite heavy hand to get good rear braking with a cable caliper brake, then that can be a problem with discs. I had to adjust after a couple of fish-tailing experiences.

Discs are the clear winner in wet-weather riding, but on dry pavement, it's just a matter of feel and personal preference. In professional racing, there are other considerations.

-- Jay Beattie.


I have had very long rides in the rain though not by choice. I never had a single problem with the brakes but with the tires. Stronger brakes would make that problem worse yet.

Since aluminum rims actually conduct heat a lot more directly than carbon wheels what would make you single out carbon wheels?

I have been thrown over the bars - WAY over the bars on my cross bike when I was braking and a trail bump locked the front wheel solid and releasing the brakes doesn't release the disk brake the same speed.

On my other cross bike I have TRP 9.0 brakes and they are so superior I have told that story more times than necessary.

I think that team mechanic summed it up - "The industry wants it and it is coming whether we want it or not. So we might as well get used to the idea."
  #33  
Old May 27th 19, 03:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 2:08:51 PM UTC-7, Duane wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
On 5/25/2019 2:19 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2019 2:16 PM, wrote:


Aerodynamics makes sense, so CF rims make sense, so disk
brakes makes sense. Simple. The only reason pro riders
are/were reluctant to use disk braces is weight.


Aerodynamics and CF rims and disk brakes make sense if
you're a pro racer who must chase after every diminishing
return.

What doesn't make sense is very ordinary riders mimicking
every choice the pro racers make.

I know a couple little kids who enjoy putting on little
capes, like their "super heroes." It's much the same thing.


It's not the same thing at all, else you would ride one
bicycle and it would be a $59.95 XMart MTB.

People like what they like and the reasons they give me in
the bike shop are different from the reasons they tell
fellow riders or their intimate associates. Who knows why? I
suspect the rider doesn't know why, but he likes it.

Bikes and cycling equipment once existed on a spectrum but
now on a branching growing fractal, each arm of which has a
spectrum. Tubulars? Clinchers? A little aero or a lot? CF
with aluminum brake track or all carbon? And sizes in
mind-numbing profusion. None of this is bad because - truly
- people like what they like.

Just as there is no one 'best' rim, there is no arbiter of
'best'. Just like life itself.


You don’t have to be a pro to be competitive. That argument is not only
specious but insulting.

--
duane


One of the reasons that the peleton is giving for so many more crashes is the disk brakes in a peleton where many still ride rim brakes. They say the braking points are very different and that is what is causing the crashes.

You don't really think that you need disks to be competitive do you? 1. Climbing - disks ARE heavier and the bike has to be built heavier to handle the dramatically different placement of forces. 2. TT - disks are less aero. 3. Sprinting - less aero and heavier. 4. descending - WHY all of the single rider descending crashes that appear to be the rider on the entirely wrong line? Is the insinuation that riders are less expert now?

So I would be more likely to suspect that Joe Clubrider is buying it because the pros are riding them. And the pros are riding them because the manufacturer charges and extra $500-$700 for them.

I most hardily do not agree with Jay about increase safety of braking in the wet. Though since he must ride often in the rain he probably has a better idea of it than I who only ride there when caught out. But again - I never had brake problems in the rain but rather tire traction problems.
  #34  
Old May 27th 19, 03:13 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 8:27:34 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:28:47 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2019 7:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 2:21:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:08:51 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote:

You don’t have to be a pro to be competitive. That argument is not only
specious but insulting.

I said "What doesn't make sense is very ordinary riders mimicking every choice
the pro racers make."

That seems insulting to you?

Why?

Because you belittle people for buying light equipment and supposedly "mimicking" pro racers. That is an unmistakable put down. How could that not be insulting?

What is an acceptable Frank bike? A Flying Pigeon?

Well, what I actually said was "mimicking every choice the pro racers
make." That was much more than just buying light equipment.

And of course, I'm not trying to forbid anything. I'm trying to discuss..

I have many riding friends. I've watched them buy custom steel bikes,
super-light aluminum ones, carbon fiber ones, aero ones, recumbents and
more. I've watched them follow every shifter upgrade from 5 cog friction
through 11 cog electronic. (Well, no Rohloffs yet in my crowd.) I've
seen guys go though great lengths to lighten their existing bikes. A few
now have switched to disc brakes. A couple are experimenting with wider
tires - 32 to 35 mm or so.

I'm sorry, but I just haven't see all that make a difference. The guys
who were faster than me (almost always the ones who put serious time,
effort and pain into training) stayed faster than me. The ones who were
slower stayed slower.

I know there are guys who enjoy hard riding with buddies and sprinting
to the next telephone pole. I've done plenty of that. And if one guy
like that drops a couple thousand bucks on new aero carbon wheels, he'll
win a few more telephone pole trophies. If, that is, there actually were
telephone pole trophies. But should he really feel proud for outspending
his friend? And if the friend retaliates with even pricier equipment,
what's the point?


Nobody I know is retaliating against anyone by buying "pricier" equipment..

I'm not giving anyone a free pass here. There are stupid purchases -- cutting edge junk that falls apart or doesn't work well, things that are too light and break, bizarre designs good for one thing like some of the newer gravel bike designs that really shine in specific conditions and pretty much suck everywhere else. I don't support buying a bike as a display of wealth. Lou's Canyon doesn't fall into any of those categories.

I can understand the appeal of fine equipment, up to a point. One of my
earliest bicycling buddies said "I can't afford the world's best stereo
system or the world's best car. But I can afford the world's best bike."
I could understand his pride even though I don't have whatever gene
makes people covet "the best in the world."

But OTOH, he was talking about an early 1970s Raleigh Professional.
Adjusted for inflation, that would cost less than $2000 today - less
than some sets of aero wheels.


A Raleigh Pro was never the best in the world. BTW, a 1976 Raleigh Pro was $650. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/retrora...76-prices.html Inflation adjusted, that is $2,919.27.

For that money today, you can get this: https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road/ae...road-cf-sl-7-0 Well, O.K., its $2,999. Even Canyon's super-bikes are a great bank for the buck.

BTW, in 1976 I spent close to $1,000 on a custom steel sport touring bike with Phil hubs and BB and some other exotic components like ER Ti spindle pedals (that broke), but not Campy except for some cable clips. It was mostly Dura Ace. My next bike was an all Campy and Phil racing bike. It was gorgeous. I bought it to retaliate against my meager savings account. I spent a huge amount of my college earnings on bike stuff. I bought a used '69 PX10 while in high school. Had I only invested in IBM stock!

-- Jay Beattie.


Jay - I have some of the best stuff available in my mind and I don't believe I've ever gotten even close to $2,000.
  #35  
Old May 27th 19, 03:16 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Tom Kunich[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,231
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 12:59:48 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 11:45:03 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2019 11:27 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:28:47 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I can understand the appeal of fine equipment, up to a point. One of my
earliest bicycling buddies said "I can't afford the world's best stereo
system or the world's best car. But I can afford the world's best bike."
I could understand his pride even though I don't have whatever gene
makes people covet "the best in the world."

But OTOH, he was talking about an early 1970s Raleigh Professional.
Adjusted for inflation, that would cost less than $2000 today - less
than some sets of aero wheels.

A Raleigh Pro was never the best in the world. BTW, a 1976 Raleigh Pro was $650. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/retrora...76-prices.html Inflation adjusted, that is $2,919.27.


OK. I was taking a guess on the price. But that's still less than some
wheel sets.

And Raleigh Pro - best in the world? Probably not, I agree. That was my
friend's statement, not mine. Only one bike at a time can be "the best
in the world." But back in those days, if everyone could agree on the
"best" - whatever it was - it probably wasn't much different from that
Raleigh.

For that money today, you can get this: https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road/ae...road-cf-sl-7-0 Well, O.K., its $2,999. Even Canyon's super-bikes are a great bank for the buck.


I'm sure it's a great bike for its intended purpose. (Even though it has
- gasp! - rim brakes.)

BTW, in 1976 I spent close to $1,000 on a custom steel sport touring bike with Phil hubs and BB and some other exotic components like ER Ti spindle pedals (that broke), but not Campy except for some cable clips. It was mostly Dura Ace. My next bike was an all Campy and Phil racing bike. It was gorgeous. I bought it to retaliate against my meager savings account. I spent a huge amount of my college earnings on bike stuff. I bought a used '69 PX10 while in high school. Had I only invested in IBM stock!


I'd have been jealous. When I got into bicycling I was married and
making not much money. In no time there were kids to raise, houses to
buy, etc. I actually traded to acquire a used Raleigh Super Course, my
first "good" bike. It was years later that I bought my first "new" bike..

That Super Course was my only bike for many years, and I rode it on
tours, commutes, utility rides, club rides, etc. I remember taking the
rear rack and sometimes the fenders off to ride centuries.

But speaking of equipment: In the 1980s, some young bucks in our bike
club staged "Survival of the Fittest" rides, fast out-and-back training
rides. The ride info said things like "No stops, no wimps."

I didn't ride with that crowd - they were all younger than me - but one
day I decided to try it. I stripped the bike down and showed up, the
only guy on clinchers; the only guy running SunTour instead of Campy;
the only guy without cleats, and probably the only one without double
butted tubing, etc. Certainly the only guy with a handlebar bag. I was
fairly nervous getting my bike off the roof rack, and even more so when
the ride leader came over and said "We're just riding to XXXX along
route YYYY and back, so when you get dropped you can find your way back.."

So maybe 15 riders started off fast, mostly single file, with me
somewhere in the middle. I remember watching the guy in front of me
(whom I still know) almost immediately missing a shift with his Campy
derailleur. I was really concentrating on not losing the draft, keeping
low on the bike, choosing the best gear, and just not getting dropped.
By my standards, we were really moving.

To my amazement, at the first significant rise - not really a hill - a
gap opened up somewhere behind. And at the second or third rise, more
guys fell off. I even passed a few. So at the turnaround, I was fairly
close to the front.

Then the main hotshot, whose parents were good friends, sort of pulled a
nasty trick. While people were still getting oriented for the
turnaround, he said "Let's go!" and took off. Only four of us happened
to be right with him, so everyone else was behind a gap. We took off in
a four or five man paceline.

... which became a three man paceline at another short uphill. Both I
and one other guy tried to take our turns pulling, but the fast leader
wouldn't let us, so we followed his wheel. And about two miles from the
end on another rise, the other guy fell off. So I cranked in behind the
fastest guy, well ahead of anyone else.

The fast young guy was really complimentary. The guy who set up the ride
came over too, and said "You did _great!" and slapped my back. But all
the other riders were silent. I could hear some of them glumly talking
about their tires, their chains and other equipment. Nobody wanted to
talk about my tires or derailleurs.

I drove home happy, but I didn't do that ride again. Job, house, wife,
kids ... and not enough money to switch to tubulars and Campy.


Imagine if you had been on a light bike with tubulars. You would have dropped the fast guy. Another missed opportunity. You might have gotten a pro contract. A slow person on a fast bike will still be slow. A fast person on a slow bike will be slower than if he were on a fast bike.

After 1973-75 or thereabouts, Shimano and Suntour offered a better value and a functionally better (and lighter in some cases) product than Campagnolo. It just looked crappy in comparison and wasn't nearly as robust. With Campy products like the Rally touring derailleur, that meant you had a ****ty shifting derailleur that would last forever. Woohooo! By 1984, I was back to Shimano, and I stopped buying Dura Ace shortly thereafter since 600EX (Ultegra) was such a good value. Even my best current bikes have Ultegra..

-- Jay Beattie.


In general I can rebuild Campy. You can't do that even with DuraAce.
  #36  
Old May 27th 19, 05:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Disk Brakes Again

On 5/26/2019 9:52 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, May 24, 2019 at 10:07:31 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, May 24, 2019 at 9:27:51 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
I don't know how many of you watched the Amgen Tour of California but I think it was a Frenchman that got way hell and gone off of the front on Stage 5 I think.

As he was descending a rather long and steep climb he looked like an absolute beginner. All of his lines were screwed up and he almost went off the road several times. On one occasion he ran off of the road and up onto the sloped dirt siding.

I could not understand how someone that could ride 7 minutes off the front of a 140 mile race was so amateurish descending. He wasn't tired because he kept his lead for a very long way after the descent finishing with a full 7 minute lead.

Two days ago during some rain I was looking at videos and ran across one of them by a pro that showed himself descending almost identically amateurishly. The same bad lines though the corners and the same very dangerous lines.

He blamed this entirely on his disk brakes. He said climbing they drag and make noises and descending they cannot be relied upon to slow you properly. The upshot is he said that NO PRO would choose disk brakes over rim brakes and that this was just another gadget to up the price of a bike.

When I was talking here about how too F-ing powerful the large disks were and how much better the V-brakes were on a cross bike I got a whole lot of static. Well it appears that the same problem is on road bikes with the smaller disks.

They also have an aero disadvantage and I can tell you that the new bikes are so aero that you have to be careful descending in a group because you keep closing up on those in front.

The original idea was to have an alternate way to brake so that you wouldn't wear out the braking surface of carbon wheels. But using the artificial cork brake pads allows you to use a set of carbon wheels as long as you can the super-light aluminum wheels with standard brake pads.

Although we are presently in a trade dispute with China I don't expect that to last long and carbon wheels from China only seem to have one problem - they do not have much spoke tension and so move around too much in side winds. And they are spectacularly cheap.

While the US made carbon wheels are slightly more aero it isn't by much and unless you're riding TT's it isn't worth paying six to eight times the price.

Another problem - rim brakes put all of the braking forces at the strongest portion of the bike. Disks put the forces at the weakest. This forces manufacturers to make much heavier forks and rear stays. And the axles have gone to much larger sizes that cannot be used with quick releases. Pro mechanics no long change out wheels on bikes but make entire bike changes and that costs a lot more time than it used to.

All in all I think that disks are nothing more than something different to buy if you're a non-mechanical enthusiast that is likely to go with the flow.


Here is what some pros say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX_EPa0ZuSM

Discs do give better braking with CF rims, they don't heat rim glue, so you don't get sew-ups squirming around on the rims. If I were doing a long descent with lots of braking on sew-ups, I might prefer a disc. Otherwise, on a rapid descent on a racing bike with clinchers on aluminum rims on dry pavement, there is no a whole lot of difference between the two, assuming both are properly adjusted and the pistons lubricated. I own both and don't find much difference, except in ways that are equally bad, e.g. rim brakes grabbing at seams or with contaminants on the rim and discs shuddering or grabbing or screaming.

If disc brakes are juiced up to the point where light braking locks up the wheel, then that's a problem. If one is used to the requisite heavy hand to get good rear braking with a cable caliper brake, then that can be a problem with discs. I had to adjust after a couple of fish-tailing experiences.

Discs are the clear winner in wet-weather riding, but on dry pavement, it's just a matter of feel and personal preference. In professional racing, there are other considerations.

-- Jay Beattie.


I have had very long rides in the rain though not by choice. I never had a single problem with the brakes but with the tires. Stronger brakes would make that problem worse yet.

Since aluminum rims actually conduct heat a lot more directly than carbon wheels what would make you single out carbon wheels?

I have been thrown over the bars - WAY over the bars on my cross bike when I was braking and a trail bump locked the front wheel solid and releasing the brakes doesn't release the disk brake the same speed.

On my other cross bike I have TRP 9.0 brakes and they are so superior I have told that story more times than necessary.

I think that team mechanic summed it up - "The industry wants it and it is coming whether we want it or not. So we might as well get used to the idea."


The industry wants it for racers because a significant number of
ordinary cyclists will want whatever the racers use - as I said earlier.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #37  
Old May 27th 19, 05:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 547
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Sun, 26 May 2019 18:06:08 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/26/2019 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2019 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 5:27:34 PM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:28:47 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2019 7:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 2:21:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:08:51 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote:

You don’t have to be a pro to be competitive. That argument is not only
specious but insulting.

I said "What doesn't make sense is very ordinary riders mimicking every choice
the pro racers make."

That seems insulting to you?

Why?

Because you belittle people for buying light equipment and supposedly "mimicking" pro racers. That is an unmistakable put down. How could that not be insulting?
What is an acceptable Frank bike? A Flying Pigeon?

Well, what I actually said was "mimicking every choice the pro racers
make." That was much more than just buying light equipment.

And of course, I'm not trying to forbid anything. I'm trying to discuss.

I have many riding friends. I've watched them buy custom steel bikes,
super-light aluminum ones, carbon fiber ones, aero ones, recumbents and
more. I've watched them follow every shifter upgrade from 5 cog friction
through 11 cog electronic. (Well, no Rohloffs yet in my crowd.) I've
seen guys go though great lengths to lighten their existing bikes. A few
now have switched to disc brakes. A couple are experimenting with wider
tires - 32 to 35 mm or so.

I'm sorry, but I just haven't see all that make a difference. The guys
who were faster than me (almost always the ones who put serious time,
effort and pain into training) stayed faster than me. The ones who were
slower stayed slower.

I know there are guys who enjoy hard riding with buddies and sprinting
to the next telephone pole. I've done plenty of that. And if one guy
like that drops a couple thousand bucks on new aero carbon wheels, he'll
win a few more telephone pole trophies. If, that is, there actually were
telephone pole trophies. But should he really feel proud for outspending
his friend? And if the friend retaliates with even pricier equipment,
what's the point?

Nobody I know is retaliating against anyone by buying "pricier" equipment.

I'm not giving anyone a free pass here. There are stupid purchases -- cutting edge junk that falls apart or doesn't work well, things that are too light and break, bizarre designs good for one thing like some of the newer gravel bike designs that really shine in specific conditions and pretty much suck everywhere else. I don't support buying a bike as a display of wealth. Lou's Canyon doesn't fall into any of those categories.

I can understand the appeal of fine equipment, up to a point. One of my
earliest bicycling buddies said "I can't afford the world's best stereo
system or the world's best car. But I can afford the world's best bike."
I could understand his pride even though I don't have whatever gene
makes people covet "the best in the world."

But OTOH, he was talking about an early 1970s Raleigh Professional.
Adjusted for inflation, that would cost less than $2000 today - less
than some sets of aero wheels.

A Raleigh Pro was never the best in the world. BTW, a 1976 Raleigh Pro was $650.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/retrora...76-prices.html Inflation adjusted, that is $2,919.27.

For that money today, you can get this: https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road/ae...road-cf-sl-7-0 Well, O.K., its $2,999. Even Canyon's super-bikes are a great bank for the buck.

I think at the moment that is the best bike you can buy for that kind of money.

Lou


But, having read the reference site it appears that one needs several
bicycles. There is the Road Bike, one assumes for riding on the roads,
and the Gravity bike? to ride in grave moments one supposes, then
there is the Urban bike for riding in the city and the Fitness bike
when one want to get some exercise. Damn! Four separate bicycles to do
what I can do with one 20 year old steel frame bike?



Four bicycles is not ridiculous. A Sunday morning road bike,
my beloved ancient Raleigh with steel mudguards, and a cute
little folder that easily goes with me to other cities where
local auto driving is undesirable. Then my fixie, which was
built expressly to avoid winter salt on the other bikes.

YMMV and probably does but each of them fills a real need
better than the others do. I gave away or sold everything else.


And than, of course, is the his and her's automobiles - gotta have a
car for those rainy days :-)
--

Cheers,

John B.
  #38  
Old May 27th 19, 11:03 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,546
Default Disk Brakes Again

Tom Kunich wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 2:08:51 PM UTC-7, Duane wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
On 5/25/2019 2:19 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2019 2:16 PM, wrote:


Aerodynamics makes sense, so CF rims make sense, so disk
brakes makes sense. Simple. The only reason pro riders
are/were reluctant to use disk braces is weight.


Aerodynamics and CF rims and disk brakes make sense if
you're a pro racer who must chase after every diminishing
return.

What doesn't make sense is very ordinary riders mimicking
every choice the pro racers make.

I know a couple little kids who enjoy putting on little
capes, like their "super heroes." It's much the same thing.


It's not the same thing at all, else you would ride one
bicycle and it would be a $59.95 XMart MTB.

People like what they like and the reasons they give me in
the bike shop are different from the reasons they tell
fellow riders or their intimate associates. Who knows why? I
suspect the rider doesn't know why, but he likes it.

Bikes and cycling equipment once existed on a spectrum but
now on a branching growing fractal, each arm of which has a
spectrum. Tubulars? Clinchers? A little aero or a lot? CF
with aluminum brake track or all carbon? And sizes in
mind-numbing profusion. None of this is bad because - truly
- people like what they like.

Just as there is no one 'best' rim, there is no arbiter of
'best'. Just like life itself.


You don’t have to be a pro to be competitive. That argument is not only
specious but insulting.

--
duane


One of the reasons that the peleton is giving for so many more crashes is
the disk brakes in a peleton where many still ride rim brakes. They say
the braking points are very different and that is what is causing the crashes.

You don't really think that you need disks to be competitive do you? 1.
Climbing - disks ARE heavier and the bike has to be built heavier to
handle the dramatically different placement of forces. 2. TT - disks are
less aero. 3. Sprinting - less aero and heavier. 4. descending - WHY all
of the single rider descending crashes that appear to be the rider on the
entirely wrong line? Is the insinuation that riders are less expert now?

So I would be more likely to suspect that Joe Clubrider is buying it
because the pros are riding them. And the pros are riding them because
the manufacturer charges and extra $500-$700 for them.

I most hardily do not agree with Jay about increase safety of braking in
the wet. Though since he must ride often in the rain he probably has a
better idea of it than I who only ride there when caught out. But again -
I never had brake problems in the rain but rather tire traction problems.


My reply was not exactly about disk brakes. It was about someone being
criticized for using carbon rims and not being on the pro tour.

From my understanding disk brakes are preferable with carbon rims. I don’t
have either so can’t comment further.

--
duane
  #39  
Old May 27th 19, 02:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Disk Brakes Again

On 5/26/2019 11:49 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2019 18:06:08 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/26/2019 5:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2019 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 5:27:34 PM UTC+2, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:28:47 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/25/2019 7:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 2:21:06 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:08:51 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote:

You don’t have to be a pro to be competitive. That argument is not only
specious but insulting.

I said "What doesn't make sense is very ordinary riders mimicking every choice
the pro racers make."

That seems insulting to you?

Why?

Because you belittle people for buying light equipment and supposedly "mimicking" pro racers. That is an unmistakable put down. How could that not be insulting?
What is an acceptable Frank bike? A Flying Pigeon?

Well, what I actually said was "mimicking every choice the pro racers
make." That was much more than just buying light equipment.

And of course, I'm not trying to forbid anything. I'm trying to discuss.

I have many riding friends. I've watched them buy custom steel bikes,
super-light aluminum ones, carbon fiber ones, aero ones, recumbents and
more. I've watched them follow every shifter upgrade from 5 cog friction
through 11 cog electronic. (Well, no Rohloffs yet in my crowd.) I've
seen guys go though great lengths to lighten their existing bikes. A few
now have switched to disc brakes. A couple are experimenting with wider
tires - 32 to 35 mm or so.

I'm sorry, but I just haven't see all that make a difference. The guys
who were faster than me (almost always the ones who put serious time,
effort and pain into training) stayed faster than me. The ones who were
slower stayed slower.

I know there are guys who enjoy hard riding with buddies and sprinting
to the next telephone pole. I've done plenty of that. And if one guy
like that drops a couple thousand bucks on new aero carbon wheels, he'll
win a few more telephone pole trophies. If, that is, there actually were
telephone pole trophies. But should he really feel proud for outspending
his friend? And if the friend retaliates with even pricier equipment,
what's the point?

Nobody I know is retaliating against anyone by buying "pricier" equipment.

I'm not giving anyone a free pass here. There are stupid purchases -- cutting edge junk that falls apart or doesn't work well, things that are too light and break, bizarre designs good for one thing like some of the newer gravel bike designs that really shine in specific conditions and pretty much suck everywhere else. I don't support buying a bike as a display of wealth. Lou's Canyon doesn't fall into any of those categories.

I can understand the appeal of fine equipment, up to a point. One of my
earliest bicycling buddies said "I can't afford the world's best stereo
system or the world's best car. But I can afford the world's best bike."
I could understand his pride even though I don't have whatever gene
makes people covet "the best in the world."

But OTOH, he was talking about an early 1970s Raleigh Professional.
Adjusted for inflation, that would cost less than $2000 today - less
than some sets of aero wheels.

A Raleigh Pro was never the best in the world. BTW, a 1976 Raleigh Pro was $650.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/retrora...76-prices.html Inflation adjusted, that is $2,919.27.

For that money today, you can get this: https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road/ae...road-cf-sl-7-0 Well, O.K., its $2,999. Even Canyon's super-bikes are a great bank for the buck.

I think at the moment that is the best bike you can buy for that kind of money.

Lou

But, having read the reference site it appears that one needs several
bicycles. There is the Road Bike, one assumes for riding on the roads,
and the Gravity bike? to ride in grave moments one supposes, then
there is the Urban bike for riding in the city and the Fitness bike
when one want to get some exercise. Damn! Four separate bicycles to do
what I can do with one 20 year old steel frame bike?



Four bicycles is not ridiculous. A Sunday morning road bike,
my beloved ancient Raleigh with steel mudguards, and a cute
little folder that easily goes with me to other cities where
local auto driving is undesirable. Then my fixie, which was
built expressly to avoid winter salt on the other bikes.

YMMV and probably does but each of them fills a real need
better than the others do. I gave away or sold everything else.


And than, of course, is the his and her's automobiles - gotta have a
car for those rainy days :-)


Buying cars for girls is simple self-preservation and keeps
her from ruining my clutch.


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #40  
Old May 27th 19, 03:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Disk Brakes Again

On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 7:16:20 PM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 12:59:48 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, May 26, 2019 at 11:45:03 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/26/2019 11:27 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 5:28:47 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I can understand the appeal of fine equipment, up to a point. One of my
earliest bicycling buddies said "I can't afford the world's best stereo
system or the world's best car. But I can afford the world's best bike."
I could understand his pride even though I don't have whatever gene
makes people covet "the best in the world."

But OTOH, he was talking about an early 1970s Raleigh Professional..
Adjusted for inflation, that would cost less than $2000 today - less
than some sets of aero wheels.

A Raleigh Pro was never the best in the world. BTW, a 1976 Raleigh Pro was $650. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/retrora...76-prices.html Inflation adjusted, that is $2,919.27.

OK. I was taking a guess on the price. But that's still less than some
wheel sets.

And Raleigh Pro - best in the world? Probably not, I agree. That was my
friend's statement, not mine. Only one bike at a time can be "the best
in the world." But back in those days, if everyone could agree on the
"best" - whatever it was - it probably wasn't much different from that
Raleigh.

For that money today, you can get this: https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road/ae...road-cf-sl-7-0 Well, O.K., its $2,999. Even Canyon's super-bikes are a great bank for the buck.

I'm sure it's a great bike for its intended purpose. (Even though it has
- gasp! - rim brakes.)

BTW, in 1976 I spent close to $1,000 on a custom steel sport touring bike with Phil hubs and BB and some other exotic components like ER Ti spindle pedals (that broke), but not Campy except for some cable clips. It was mostly Dura Ace. My next bike was an all Campy and Phil racing bike. It was gorgeous. I bought it to retaliate against my meager savings account. I spent a huge amount of my college earnings on bike stuff. I bought a used '69 PX10 while in high school. Had I only invested in IBM stock!

I'd have been jealous. When I got into bicycling I was married and
making not much money. In no time there were kids to raise, houses to
buy, etc. I actually traded to acquire a used Raleigh Super Course, my
first "good" bike. It was years later that I bought my first "new" bike.

That Super Course was my only bike for many years, and I rode it on
tours, commutes, utility rides, club rides, etc. I remember taking the
rear rack and sometimes the fenders off to ride centuries.

But speaking of equipment: In the 1980s, some young bucks in our bike
club staged "Survival of the Fittest" rides, fast out-and-back training
rides. The ride info said things like "No stops, no wimps."

I didn't ride with that crowd - they were all younger than me - but one
day I decided to try it. I stripped the bike down and showed up, the
only guy on clinchers; the only guy running SunTour instead of Campy;
the only guy without cleats, and probably the only one without double
butted tubing, etc. Certainly the only guy with a handlebar bag. I was
fairly nervous getting my bike off the roof rack, and even more so when
the ride leader came over and said "We're just riding to XXXX along
route YYYY and back, so when you get dropped you can find your way back."

So maybe 15 riders started off fast, mostly single file, with me
somewhere in the middle. I remember watching the guy in front of me
(whom I still know) almost immediately missing a shift with his Campy
derailleur. I was really concentrating on not losing the draft, keeping
low on the bike, choosing the best gear, and just not getting dropped..
By my standards, we were really moving.

To my amazement, at the first significant rise - not really a hill - a
gap opened up somewhere behind. And at the second or third rise, more
guys fell off. I even passed a few. So at the turnaround, I was fairly
close to the front.

Then the main hotshot, whose parents were good friends, sort of pulled a
nasty trick. While people were still getting oriented for the
turnaround, he said "Let's go!" and took off. Only four of us happened
to be right with him, so everyone else was behind a gap. We took off in
a four or five man paceline.

... which became a three man paceline at another short uphill. Both I
and one other guy tried to take our turns pulling, but the fast leader
wouldn't let us, so we followed his wheel. And about two miles from the
end on another rise, the other guy fell off. So I cranked in behind the
fastest guy, well ahead of anyone else.

The fast young guy was really complimentary. The guy who set up the ride
came over too, and said "You did _great!" and slapped my back. But all
the other riders were silent. I could hear some of them glumly talking
about their tires, their chains and other equipment. Nobody wanted to
talk about my tires or derailleurs.

I drove home happy, but I didn't do that ride again. Job, house, wife,
kids ... and not enough money to switch to tubulars and Campy.


Imagine if you had been on a light bike with tubulars. You would have dropped the fast guy. Another missed opportunity. You might have gotten a pro contract. A slow person on a fast bike will still be slow. A fast person on a slow bike will be slower than if he were on a fast bike.

After 1973-75 or thereabouts, Shimano and Suntour offered a better value and a functionally better (and lighter in some cases) product than Campagnolo. It just looked crappy in comparison and wasn't nearly as robust. With Campy products like the Rally touring derailleur, that meant you had a ****ty shifting derailleur that would last forever. Woohooo! By 1984, I was back to Shimano, and I stopped buying Dura Ace shortly thereafter since 600EX (Ultegra) was such a good value. Even my best current bikes have Ultegra.

-- Jay Beattie.


In general I can rebuild Campy. You can't do that even with DuraAce.


True, but in 35 years, I haven't really needed to rebuild anything except a left Ultegra STI lever (and excluding wear items like derailleur pulleys), and the cost of shifting to Campy would be cost-prohibitive, from hubs to cassettes, chains, etc. I did not like having to buy a complete left lever, but it wasn't that expensive.

-- Jay Beattie.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Disk vs. V-Brakes mike[_3_] Techniques 19 May 9th 07 03:46 AM
Disk brakes? Sticky Wicket Techniques 112 February 8th 07 05:27 PM
Disk brakes General 13 July 3rd 06 03:44 PM
Disk brakes? Hot! ain Mountain Biking 20 May 5th 04 12:57 PM
Disk Brakes john Mountain Biking 4 January 22nd 04 02:44 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.